Abstract
In this paper, using variational methods and two critical point theorems, we prove the existence of two intervals for a parameter for which a nonlinear equation of sixth-order admits three weak solutions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
The Sturm–Liouville equations of the 2mth order are as follows:
where u satisfies in 2m boundary conditions at the end points a and b. Usually, the functions \(p_k\in L^\infty (a,b),\) \((0\le k\le m),\) and f is a Carathéodory function.
These problems play a crucial role in applied mathematics, nonlinear physics and engineering. They appear in the modeling and studying of many phenomena such as quantum and classical mechanics, vibrating rods and beams, hydrodynamic and magnetic hydrodynamic, a variety of fluid mechanics, etc.
In the past two decades, many researchers have studied these equations of different orders and with numerical methods such as Homotopy perturbation method [1], Lie-Group methods [16], Chebyshev method [8], Chebyshev differential matrices [20], variational iteration method [19], Matrix methods [17], shooting method [12] and Adomian method [14].
Authors have also paid attention to nonlinear analysis methods in studying Sturm–Liouville equations. In the last few years, many mathematicians, using topological degree theory and variational methods, have investigated Sturm–Liouville boundary value problems [2, 4, 9,10,11, 15, 18, 21, 22, 24, 25].
In [4, 9], the authors, employing variational method and critical point theorems, proved the existence of weak solutions for the following problem:
where \(p_0,\,q_0,\,r_0\in L^\infty ([0,1])\) and \(f_0\) is a Carathéodory function.
Also, in [10], the authors showed the existence of at least one non-trivial solution for the following system:
for \(1\le i\le n,\) where \(p_i,\,q_i,\,r_i\in L^\infty ([0,1])\) (\(1\le i\le n\)) and \(F:[0,1]\times {{\mathbb {R}}} ^n\rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}} \) is a function such that \(F(\cdot ,t_1,\cdot \cdot \cdot ,t_n)\) is measurable in [0, 1] for all \((t_1,\cdot \cdot \cdot ,t_n)\in {{\mathbb {R}}} ^n,\) \(F(x,\cdot ,\cdot \cdot \cdot ,\cdot )\) is a \(C^1\) in \({{\mathbb {R}}} ^n\) for every \(x\in [0,1].\)
In the past, Sturm–Liouville equations of sixth-order have been less examined. The purpose of this paper is to consider the following sixth-order Sturm–Liouville problem:
where \(p,\,q,\,r,\,s\in L^\infty ([0,1])\) with \(p^-:=\mathrm{ess\,inf}_{t\in [0,1]}p(t)>0\), \(\lambda \) is a positive parameter and f is a Carathéodory function. In other words, we wish to guarantee the existence of three weak solutions to the problem (1.1).
It is worth mentioning that sixth-order equations arise in studies on circular structures and appear in the literature [6, 7, 13].
The organization of the rest of the paper is as follows. Section 2 describes the basic notations and auxiliary results. In the last section, we present our main results.
2 Preliminaries and auxiliary results
First, we here recall three critical point theorems which are our main tools to prove the results. In two of these theorems, the coercivity of the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \) is assumed and in the third one, a suitable sign hypothesis is considered.
Theorem 2.1
([3, Theorem 3.1]) Assume that X be a reflexive and separable real Banach space, \(\Phi :X \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a sequentially weakly lower semi-continuous and non-negative continuously Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gâteaux derivative admits a continuous inverse on \(X^*\), \(\Psi :X \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a continuously Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gâteaux derivative is compact. Let there exists \(x_0\in X\) such that
and
for all \(\lambda \in [0,+\infty ).\) Suppose that there exist \(r >0\) and \({\bar{x}}\in X\), with \(r<\Phi ({\bar{x}})\) such that
where \(\overline{\Phi ^{-1}(]-\infty ,r[)}^w\) denotes the closure of \(\Phi ^{-1}(]-\infty ,r[)\) in the weak topology. Then, for each
the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \) has at least three critical points in X. In addition, for each \(h>1,\) there exist an open interval
and a positive real number \(\sigma \) such that, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda _2,\) the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \) has at least three critical points in X whose norms are less than \(\sigma \).
Theorem 2.2
( [5, Theorem 3.2]) Assume that X be a reflexive real Banach space, \(\Phi :X \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a coercive and continuously Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gâteaux derivative admits a continuous inverse on \(X^*\), \(\Psi :X \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a continuously Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gâteaux derivative is compact, such that
Let there exists a constant \(r>0\) and \({\bar{x}}\in X\), with \(\Phi ({\bar{x}})>2r\), such that
-
(a1)
\(\frac{\sup _{x\in \Phi ^{-1}(]-\infty ,r[)}\Psi (x)}{r}<\frac{2}{3}\frac{\Psi ({\bar{x}})}{\Phi ({\bar{x}})}\),
-
(a2)
for each \(\lambda \in \Bigl ] \frac{3}{2}\frac{\Phi ({\bar{x}})}{\Psi ({\bar{x}})}, \frac{r}{\sup _{x\in \Phi ^{-1}(]-\infty ,r[)}\Psi (x)} \Bigr [,\) the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \) is coercive.
Then, for each \(\lambda \in \Bigl ] \frac{3}{2}\frac{\Phi ({\bar{x}})}{\Psi ({\bar{x}})}, \frac{r}{\sup _{x\in \Phi ^{-1}(]-\infty ,r[)}\Psi (x)} \Bigr [,\) the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \) has at least three distinct critical points.
Theorem 2.3
( [5, Theorem 3.1]) Suppose that X be a reflexive real Banach space; \(\Phi :X \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a coercive, convex and continuously Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gâteaux derivative admits a continuous inverse on \(X^*\), \(\Psi :X \rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be a continuously Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gâteaux derivative is compact, such that
Assume that there exist two positive constants \(r_1,r_2 >0\) and \({\bar{x}}\in X\), with \(2r_1<\Phi ({\bar{x}})<\frac{r_2}{2}\), such that
-
(b1)
\(\frac{\sup _{x\in \Phi ^{-1}(]-\infty ,r_1[)}\Psi (x)}{r_1}<\frac{2}{3}\frac{\Psi ({\bar{x}})}{\Phi ({\bar{x}})}\),
-
(b2)
\(\frac{\sup _{x\in \Phi ^{-1}(]-\infty ,r_2[)}\Psi (x)}{r_2}<\frac{1}{3}\frac{\Psi ({\bar{x}})}{\Phi ({\bar{x}})}\),
-
(b3)
for each \(\lambda \) in
$$\begin{aligned} \Lambda ^*:=\left. \right] \frac{3}{2}\frac{\Phi ({\bar{x}})}{\Psi ({\bar{x}})}, \min \bigg \{\frac{r_1}{\sup _{x\in \Phi ^{-1}(]-\infty ,r_1[)}\Psi (x)}, \frac{r_2}{2\sup _{x\in \Phi ^{-1}(]-\infty ,r_2[)}\Psi (x)}\bigg \}\left[ \right. \end{aligned}$$and for every \(x_1,x_2 \in X\), which are local minima for the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \), and such that \(\Psi (x_1)\ge 0\) and \(\Psi (x_2)\ge 0\), one has \(\inf _{t \in [0,1]}\Psi (tx_1+(1-t)x_2) \ge 0\).
Then, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda ^*\) the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \) has at least three distinct critical points which lie in \(\Phi ^{-1}]-\infty , r_2[\).
Let us introduce some notations. Hereafter, let
be endowed with the inner product
which induces the norm
where \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _2\) denotes the usual norm in \(L^2(0,1).\)
Since X is a closed subspace of \(H^3(0,1),\) \((X,\Vert u\Vert _X)\) is a Banach space.
Now, we recall the following useful Poincaré type inequalities (see [6]):
for all \(u\in X.\)
Take (2.1) into account, by adopting the appropriate conditions on the functions p, q, r, s, one has, the following norm
is equivalent to \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _X,\) that still makes X a Hilbert space.
Now, consider the following set of conditions:
-
(C1)
\(q^-\ge 0,\) \(r^-\ge 0,\) \(s^-\ge 0,\)
-
(C2)
\(q^-\ge 0,\) \(r^-\ge 0,\) \(s^-< 0\) and \(-\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}-\frac{r^-}{\pi ^4}-\frac{s^-}{\pi ^6}<p^-,\)
-
(C3)
\(q^-\ge 0,\) \(r^-<0,\) \(s^-\ge 0\) and \(-\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}-\frac{r^-}{\pi ^4}<p^-,\)
-
(C4)
\(q^-\ge 0,\) \(r^-<0,\) \(s^-< 0\) and \(-\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}-\frac{r^-}{\pi ^4}-\frac{s^-}{\pi ^6}<p^-,\)
-
(C5)
\(q^-< 0,\) \(r^-\ge 0,\) \(s^-\ge 0\) and \(-\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}<p^-,\)
-
(C6)
\(q^-< 0,\) \(r^-\ge 0,\) \(s^-< 0\) and \(\max \big \{-\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2},-\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}-\frac{r^-}{\pi ^4}-\frac{s^-}{\pi ^6}\big \}<p^-,\)
-
(C7)
\(q^-< 0,\) \(r^-<0,\) \(s^-\ge 0\) and \(-\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}-\frac{r^-}{\pi ^4}<p^-,\)
-
(C8)
\(q^-< 0,\) \(r^-<0,\) \(s^-< 0\) and \(-\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}-\frac{r^-}{\pi ^4}-\frac{s^-}{\pi ^6}<p^-,\)
where
We can state following proposition.
Proposition 2.4
Let \(p^->0\). The condition
-
(C)
\(\displaystyle \max \bigg \{ -\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2},-\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}-\frac{r^-}{\pi ^4}, -\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}-\frac{r^-}{\pi ^4}-\frac{s^-}{\pi ^6}\bigg \}<p^-\)
holds if and only if one of conditions (C1)-(C8) holds.
Proof
Suppose that one of conditions (C1)-(C8) holds. For example, we prove the following three cases.
Let (C1) holds. Then, we have
Also, let (C3) holds. One has,
If (C8) holds, we obtain
By the same reasoning as above, readers can prove other cases. So, condition (C) is true. On the contrary, assume (C). Clearly, according to the signs of \(q^-,r^-,s^-\), one of conditions (C1)-(C8) is immediately verified. \(\square \)
In addition, setting
we point out the following proposition.
Proposition 2.5
Let \(p^->0\) and condition (C) holds. Then, for every \(u\in X,\)
Proof
Assume that (C1) holds. One has \(\Vert u\Vert ^2\ge p^- \Vert u'''\Vert _2^2\) and (2.3) holds with \(\delta =p^-.\) Suppose that (C2) holds. In view of (2.1) one has
So, if \(r^-+\frac{s^-}{\pi ^2}\ge 0,\) we conclude that the (2.3) holds with \(\delta =p^-.\) If \(r^-+\frac{s^-}{\pi ^2}< 0,\) again from (2.1)
Hence, if \(q^-+\frac{r^-}{\pi ^2}+\frac{s^-}{\pi ^4}\ge 0,\) we conclude that the (2.3) holds with \(\delta =p^-.\) If \(q^-+\frac{r^-}{\pi ^2}+\frac{s^-}{\pi ^4}< 0,\) again from (2.1)
Therefore, always (2.3) holds with \(\delta =\min \{p^-,p^-+\frac{q^-}{\pi ^2}+\frac{r^-}{\pi ^4}+\frac{s^-}{\pi ^6}\}.\) Exploiting similar arguments shown above, readers can prove other cases. \(\square \)
Proposition 2.6
Let \(p^->0\) and condition (C) holds. Then, for every \(u\in X,\)
Proof
Since \(H_0^1(0,1)\hookrightarrow C^0(0,1)\) and \(\Vert u\Vert _\infty <\frac{1}{2}\Vert u'\Vert _2,\) take (2.1) into account, one obtains
So, the conclusion follows from (2.3). \(\square \)
Remark 2.7
It is simple to observe that there exists \(M>0\) such that \(\Vert u\Vert ^2\le M \Vert u\Vert _X^2.\) Hence, in view of (2.3), we observe that \(\Vert \cdot \Vert \) defines a norm on X equivalent to \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _X.\)
Let \(f:[0,1]\times {\mathbb {R}}\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) be an \(L^1\)-Carathéodory functions. We recall that \(f:[0,1]\times {\mathbb {R}}\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) is an \(L^1\)-Carathéodory function if
-
(a)
the mapping \(x\longmapsto f(x,t)\) is measurable for every \(t\in {\mathbb {R}}\);
-
(b)
the mapping \(t\longmapsto f(x,t)\) is continuous for almost every \(x\in [0,1]\);
-
(c)
for every \(\rho >0\), the function \(l_\rho (x):=\sup _{|t|\le \rho }|f(x,t)|\in L^1((0,1)).\)
Corresponding to the function f, we introduce the function \(F:[0,1]\times {\mathbb {R}}\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) as follows
for all \((x,t)\in [0,1]\times {\mathbb {R}}\).
In order to study (1.1), we consider the functionals \(\Phi ,\Psi :X\rightarrow {\mathbb {R}}\) defined by
for every \(u\in X.\)
With standard arguments, we obtain that \(\Phi ,\Psi \in C^1(X,{\mathbb {R}})\) and
for any \(v\in X.\) The following proposition will be useful in the proof of the main results.
Proposition 2.8
Let \(T:X\rightarrow X^*\) be the operator defined by
for every \(u,v\in X.\) Then, T admits a continuous inverse on \(X^*.\)
Proof
First, for every \(u\in X\setminus \{0\},\) one has
which shows T is coercive. Furthermore, for all \(u,v\in X,\) we have
so, T is uniformly monotone. Theorem 26.A(d) of [23] ensures the existence of the inverse operator \(T^{-1}\) of T. To prove the continuity of the operator \(T^{-1}\) on \(X^*\), Choose \(g_1,g_2\in X^*.\) By (2.5), we deduce
Thus, \(T^{-1}\) is continuous. This completes the proof. \(\square \)
Finally, we say that a function \(u\in X\) is a weak solution of (1.1) if
holds for all \(v\in X\).
3 Main results
In this section, the main results are formulated. Our first existence result is the following.
Theorem 3.1
Let there exist a function \(w\in X\) and a positive constant r such that
-
(A1)
\(\Vert w\Vert ^2>2r,\)
-
(A2)
\( \displaystyle \int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \left[ -\frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}, \frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}\right] }F(x,t)dx<r\frac{\displaystyle \int _0^1F(x,w(x))dx}{r+\frac{\Vert w\Vert ^2}{2}}, \)
-
(A3)
\(\frac{2}{\delta \pi ^6}\limsup _{|t|\rightarrow +\infty }\displaystyle \frac{F(x,t)}{t^2}< \Theta _1\) uniformly with respect to \(x\in [0,1]\) where
$$\begin{aligned} \Theta _1:=\max \Bigg \{&\frac{\int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \big [-\frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}, \frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}\big ]}F(x,t)dx}{r},\\&\frac{\frac{2r}{\Vert w\Vert ^2}\int _0^1F(x,w(x))dx -\int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \big [-\frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}, \frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}\big ]}F(x,t)dx}{hr}\Bigg \} \end{aligned}$$with \(h>1.\)
Then, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda _1,\) where
the problem (1.1) admits at least three weak solutions in X. In addition, for each \(h>1,\) there exist an open interval
and a positive real number \(\sigma \) such that, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda _2,\) the problem (1.1) admits at least three weak solutions in X whose norms are less than \(\sigma .\)
Proof
With the purpose of using Theorem 2.1, we consider X, \(\Phi \) and \(\Psi \) as in the previous section. Owing to Proposition 2.8, \(\Phi '\) admits a continuous inverse on \(X^*.\) It is well known that \(\Psi \) is a Gâteaux differentiable functional whose Gâteaux derivative at the point \(u\in X\) is the functional \(\Psi '(u)\in X^*,\) defined by
for every \(v\in X,\) and that \(\Psi ':X\rightarrow X^*\) is a compact and continuous operator. According to (A3), there exist two constant \(\gamma ,\tau \in {{\mathbb {R}}} \) with \(\gamma <\Theta _1\) such that
for all \(x\in (0,1)\) and all \(t\in {{\mathbb {R}}} .\) Fix \(u\in X.\) Then
for all \(x\in (0,1).\)
To prove the coercivity of the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi ,\) first, we suppose that \(\gamma >0.\) Thus, for any fixed \(\lambda \in ]0,\frac{1}{\Theta _1}],\) since
by (3.1), we obtain
from which it yilds
On the other hand, if \(\gamma \le 0,\) clearly, we have
Hence, in both cases the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \) is coercive. Also, according to (A1), we achieve \(\Phi (w)>r.\) In view of \(\Vert u\Vert _\infty \le \frac{1}{2\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\Vert u\Vert \) for each \(u\in X\) and from the definition of \(\Phi ,\) we get
consequently,
So, from (A2), we obtain
Now, we can use Theorem 2.1. Note for each \(x\in [0,1],\)
and
By (A2), we have
Also,
Take (A2) into account, one has
since \(\int _0^1 F(x,w(x))dx\ge 0.\) Owing to Theorem 2.1 with \(x_0=0,\) \({\bar{x}}_1=w,\) it follows that, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda _1,\) problem (1.1) admits at least three weak solutions and there exist an open interval \(\Lambda _2\subset [0,\rho ]\) and real positive number \(\sigma \) such that, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda _2,\) problem (1.1) admits at least three weak solutions whose norms in X are less than \(\sigma .\) This completes the proof. \(\square \)
Here, we present our second existence result.
Theorem 3.2
Let there exist a positive constant r and a function \(w\in X\) such that
-
(B1)
\(\Vert w\Vert ^2>4r,\)
-
(B2)
\( \displaystyle \int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \left[ -\frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}, \frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}\right] }F(x,t)dx<\frac{4r}{3}\frac{\displaystyle \int _0^1F(x,w(x))dx}{\Vert w\Vert ^2}, \)
-
(B3)
\(\frac{2}{\delta \pi ^6}\limsup _{|t|\rightarrow +\infty }\displaystyle \frac{F(x,t)}{t^2} < \frac{\int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \left[ -\frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}, \frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r}{2}}\right] }F(x,t)dx}{r}.\)
Then, for each
the problem (1.1) admits at least three weak solutions in X.
Proof
We will apply Theorem 2.2 to problem (1.1). Take the functionals \(\Phi ,\Psi :X\rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}} \) as given in the previous section. By (B1), we obtain \(\Phi (w)>2r.\) Bearing in mind \(\Vert u\Vert _\infty \le \frac{1}{2\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\Vert u\Vert \) for each \(u\in X,\) from the definition of \(\Phi ,\) we get
consequently,
Hence, from (B2), we deduce
Moreover, according to (B3) there exist two constants \(\eta ,\vartheta \in {{\mathbb {R}}} \) with
such that
for all \(x\in [0,1]\) and all \(t\in {{\mathbb {R}}} .\) Fix \(u\in X.\) Then
for all \(x\in [0,1].\)
To prove the coercivity of the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi ,\) first, we suppose that \(\eta >0.\) So, for any fixed
since
exploiting (3.2), we get
and therefore,
Also, if \(\eta \le 0,\) clearly, we have
So, in both cases the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \) is coercive. Hence, all the assumptions of Theorem 2.2 are verified and the conclusion follows. \(\square \)
Now, we exhibit our third existence result.
Theorem 3.3
Let \(f:[0,1]\times {{\mathbb {R}}} \rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}} \) satisfies the condition \(f(x,t)\ge 0\) for all \(x\in [0,1]\) and \(t\ge 0.\) Suppose that there exist a function \(w\in X\) and two positive constants \(r_1\) and \(r_2\) with \(4r_1<\Vert w\Vert ^2<r_2\) such that
-
(H1)
$$\begin{aligned} \displaystyle \int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \left[ -\frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r_1}{2}}, \frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r_1}{2}}\right] }F(x,t)dx<\frac{4r_1}{3}\frac{\displaystyle \int _0^1F(x,w(x))dx}{\Vert w\Vert ^2}, \end{aligned}$$
-
(H2)
$$\begin{aligned} \displaystyle \int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \left[ -\frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r_2}{2}}, \frac{1}{\pi ^2\sqrt{\delta }}\sqrt{\frac{r_2}{2}}\right] }F(x,t)dx<\frac{2r_2}{3}\frac{\displaystyle \int _0^1F(x,w(x))dx}{\Vert w\Vert ^2}. \end{aligned}$$
Then, for each
where
the problem (1.1) admits at least three non-negative weak solutions \(v^1,\,v^2,\,v^3\) such that
for each \(x\in [0,1],\) \(j=1,2,3.\)
Proof
We want to apply Theorem 2.3. Let us check the functional \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \) satisfies the assumption (b3) of Theorem 2.3. Assume that \(u_1\) and \(u_2\) be two local minima for \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \). Then, \(u_1\) and \(u_2\) are critical points for \(\Phi -\lambda \Psi \), and so, they are weak solutions for the problem (1.1). Since \(f(x,t)\ge 0\) for all \((x,t)\in [0,1]\times ({{\mathbb {R}}} ^+\cup \{0\}),\) from the Weak Maximum Principle [23], we get \(u_1(x)\ge 0\) and \(u_2(x)\ge 0\) for all \(x \in [0,1]\). Hence, one has \(f(s u_1+(1-s)u_2)\ge 0\) and consequently, \(\Psi (s u_1+(1-s)u_2)\ge 0\) for all \(s \in [0,1]\). Furthermore, owing to \(4r_1<\Vert w\Vert ^2<r_2,\) we have \(2r_1<\Phi (w)<\frac{r_2}{2}.\) Thanks to assumption (H1), it follows
As above, recalling (H2), we achieve
Hence, all hypotheses of Theorem 2.3 are satisfied. So, problem (1.1) admits at least three distinct weak solutions in X. This concludes the proof. \(\square \)
In sequel, we present the Corollaries 3.4–3.6 which are special cases of Theorems 3.1–3.3, respectively, for a fixed test function w.
Put
It is easy to see that \(k>0\) and \(\delta <k.\)
Corollary 3.4
Assume that there exist two positive constants c and d with \(c<\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{2\pi ^2}d\) such that
-
(A4)
\(F(x,t)\ge 0\) for a.e. \(x\in [0,\frac{2}{5}]\cup [\frac{3}{5},1],\) and \(t\in [0,d],\)
-
(A5)
$$\begin{aligned} \displaystyle \int _0^1 \sup _{t\in [-c,c]}F(x,t)dx<(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2\frac{\displaystyle \int _{\frac{2}{5}}^{\frac{3}{5}}F(x,d)dx}{(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2+\frac{9375}{4}kd^2}, \end{aligned}$$
-
(A6)
\(\frac{2}{\delta \pi ^6}\limsup _{|t|\rightarrow +\infty }\displaystyle \frac{F(x,t)}{t^2}< \Theta _3\) uniformly with respect to \(x\in [0,1]\) where
$$\begin{aligned} \Theta _3:=\max \Bigg \{&\frac{\int _0^1 \sup _{t\in [-c,c]}F(x,t)dx}{2(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2},\\&\frac{(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2 \frac{\int _{\frac{2}{5}}^{\frac{3}{5}}F(x,d)dx}{\frac{9375}{4}kd^2}-\int _0^1 \sup _{t\in [-c,c]}F(x,t)dx}{2h(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2} \Bigg \} \end{aligned}$$with \(h>1.\)
Then, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda _1',\) where
the problem (1.1) admits at least three weak solutions in X. In addition, for each \(h>1,\) there exist an open interval
and a positive real constant \(\sigma \) such that, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda _2',\) the problem (1.1) admits at least three weak solutions in X whose norms are less than \(\sigma .\)
Proof
We claim that all the hypotheses of Theorem 3.1 are fulfilled with \(r=2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c)^2\) and
where \(\varrho (x)=\left( \frac{5}{2}\right) ^4x^4-2\left( \frac{5}{2}\right) ^3x^3+5x\) for all \(x\in [0,2/5[\). A simple computation shows that \(w\in X,\) and in particular,
So, bearing \(c<\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{2\pi ^2}d\) in mind, we get \(\Vert w\Vert ^2>2r\). Since, \(0\le w(x)\le d\) for each \(x\in [0,1]\) the assumption (A4) assures that
thanks to (A5), we deduce
thus, (A2) holds (note \(c^2=\frac{r}{2\delta \pi ^4}\)). Next, notice that
and
Additionally,
Finally, note that
and owing to \(\Lambda _1'\subseteq \Lambda _1\) and \(\Lambda _2'\subseteq \Lambda _2,\) our conclusion follows by Theorem 3.1. \(\square \)
Corollary 3.5
Suppose that there exist two positive constants c and d with \(c<\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{2\pi ^2\sqrt{2}}d\) such that the assumption (A4) in Corollary 3.4 holds. Assume further that
-
(B4)
\( \frac{\displaystyle \int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \left[ -c, c\right] }F(x,t)dx}{2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c)^2}<\frac{4}{3}\frac{\displaystyle \int _{2/5}^{3/5}F(x,d)dx}{9375kd^2}, \)
-
(B5)
\(\frac{2}{\delta \pi ^6}\limsup _{|t|\rightarrow +\infty }\displaystyle \frac{F(x,t)}{t^2} < \frac{\int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \left[ -c,c\right] }F(x,t)dx}{2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c)^2}.\)
Then, for each
the problem (1.1) admits at least three weak solutions.
Proof
All the hypotheses of Theorem 3.2 are fulfilled by choosing w as given in (3.4) and \(2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c)^2.\) So, in light of Theorem 3.2, we achieve the conclusion. \(\square \)
Corollary 3.6
Suppose that \(f:[0,1]\times {{\mathbb {R}}} \rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}} \) satisfies the condition \(f(x,t)\ge 0\) for all \(x\in [0,1]\) and \(t\ge 0.\) Also, let there exist three positive constants \(c_1,c_2\) and d with \(c_1<\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{2\sqrt{2}\pi ^2}\,d\) and \(\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{\pi ^2\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{\frac{k}{\delta }}\,d<c_2\) such that
-
(H3)
$$\begin{aligned}\frac{\displaystyle \int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \left[ -c_1,c_1\right] }F(x,t)dx}{2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c_1)^2} <\frac{4}{3}\frac{\displaystyle \int _{2/5}^{3/5}F(x,d)dx}{9375kd^2}, \end{aligned}$$
-
(H4)
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\displaystyle \int _0^1 \sup _{t\in \left[ -c_2,c_2\right] }F(x,t)dx}{2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c_2)^2} <\frac{2}{3}\frac{\displaystyle \int _{2/5}^{3/5}F(x,d)dx}{9375kd^2}. \end{aligned}$$
Then, for each
where
problem (1.1) admits at least three non-negative weak solutions \(v^1,\,v^2,\,v^3\) such that
for each \(x\in [0,1],\) \(j=1,2,3.\)
Proof
We conclude the stated assertion by exploiting Theorem 3.3 with w as defined in (3.4), \(r_1=2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c_1)^2\) and \(r_2=2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c_2)^2.\) \(\square \)
Now, we exhibit the following corollaries which are particular cases of Corollaries 3.4–3.6 in the autonomous case. Assume that the function \(f:{{\mathbb {R}}} \rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}} \) is continuous and set \(F(t)=\int _0^t f(\xi )d\xi \) for all \(t\in {{\mathbb {R}}} .\)
Corollary 3.7
Suppose that there exist two positive constants c and d with \(c<\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{2\pi ^2}\,d\) such that
-
(A7)
\(f(t)\ge 0\) for all \(t\in [0,d]\)
-
(A8)
\(\displaystyle \max _{t\in [-c,c]}F(t)<(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2\frac{{\frac{1}{5}}F(d)}{(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2+\frac{9375}{4}kd^2},\)
-
(A9)
\(\frac{2}{\delta \pi ^6}\limsup _{|t|\rightarrow +\infty }\displaystyle \frac{F(t)}{t^2}< \Theta _5\)
where
$$\begin{aligned} \Theta _5:=\max \Bigg \{&\frac{\max _{t\in [-c,c]}F(t)}{2(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2}, \frac{\frac{4}{3}25^{-3}(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2 \frac{F(d)}{kd^2}-\max _{t\in [-c,c]}F(t)}{2h(\pi ^2c\sqrt{\delta })^2} \Bigg \} \end{aligned}$$with \(h>1.\)
Then, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda _1'',\) where
the problem
admits at least three weak solutions in X. In addition, for each \(h>1,\) there exist an open interval
and a positive real number \(\sigma \) such that, for each \(\lambda \in \Lambda _2'',\) the problem (3.5) admits at least three weak solutions in X whose norms are less than \(\sigma .\)
Corollary 3.8
Let there exist two positive constants c and d with \(c<\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{2\pi ^2\sqrt{2}}d\) such that the assumption (A7) in Corollary 3.7 holds. Suppose further that
-
(B6)
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\max _{t\in \left[ -c, c\right] }F(t)}{2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c)^2}<\left( \frac{2}{375}\right) ^2\frac{F(d)}{kd^2}, \end{aligned}$$
-
(B7)
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{2}{\delta \pi ^6}\limsup _{|t|\rightarrow +\infty }\frac{F(t)}{t^2} < \frac{\max _{t\in \left[ -c,c\right] }F(t)}{2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c)^2}. \end{aligned}$$
Then, for each
the problem (3.5) admits at least three weak solutions.
Corollary 3.9
Let \(f:{{\mathbb {R}}} \rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}} \) satisfies the condition \(f(t)\ge 0\) for all \(t\ge 0.\) Suppose that there exist three positive constants \(c_1,c_2\) and d with \(c_1<\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{2\pi ^2\sqrt{2}}\,d\) and \(\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{\pi ^2\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{\frac{k}{\delta }}\,d<c_2\) such that
-
(H5)
\(\frac{\max _{t\in \left[ -c_1,c_1\right] }F(t)}{2(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c_1)^2} <\left( \frac{2}{375}\right) ^2\frac{F(d)}{kd^2}, \)
-
(H6)
\( \frac{\max _{t\in \left[ -c_2,c_2\right] }F(t)}{(\sqrt{\delta }\pi ^2c_2)^2} <\left( \frac{2}{375}\right) ^2\frac{F(d)}{kd^2}. \)
Then, for each
where
problem (3.5) admits at least three non-negative weak solutions \(v^1,\,v^2,\,v^3\) such that
for each \(x\in [0,1],\) \(j=1,2,3.\)
In support of our theoretical conclusions, we present an example that is entirely consistent with them.
Example 3.10
Assume that \(p(x)=4,\) \(q(x)=\frac{(\pi x)^2}{3},\) \(r(x)=\frac{(\pi x)^4}{3}\) and \(s(x)=\frac{(\pi x)^6}{3}\) for all \(x\in [0,1].\) Clearly, we have \(p^-=4,\) \(q^-=r^-=s^-=0.\) In view of (2.2) and (3.3), one has \(\delta =4\) and \(k=5.\) Additionally, define \(f:[0,1]\times {{\mathbb {R}}} \rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}} \) by \(f(x,t)=xf^*(t)\) where
where \(f^{**}:]70,+\infty [\rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}} \) can be any arbitrary function. A simple calculation shows that
where \(F^*(t)=\int _0^t f^*(\xi )d\xi \) for all \(t\in {{\mathbb {R}}} .\) We now verify that the assumptions of Corollary 3.6 are hold. Considering, for example, \(c_1=1,\) \(d=3\) and \(c_2=70,\) we find that \(c_1=1<\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{2\pi ^2\sqrt{2}}d \thickapprox 10.40\) and \(\frac{25\sqrt{15}}{\pi ^2\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{\frac{k}{\delta }}d\thickapprox 23.26 <c_2=70.\) Moreover,
From (3.6) and (3.7), we get the conditions (H3) and (H4) of Corollary 3.6 are verified. Hence, it follows that for each \(\lambda \in [749,1558],\) the problem
admits at least three non-negative weak solutions \(v^1,\,v^2,\,v^3\) such that
for each \(x\in [0,1],\) \(j=1,2,3.\)
Remark 3.11
In the above example, we can place many functions instead of p, q, r, s and f to study various other problems. For instance, consider the function \(f:[0,1]\times {{\mathbb {R}}} \rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}} \) defined by \(f(x,t)=xf^\blacklozenge (t)\) where
Clearly, \(F(x,t)=xF^\blacklozenge (t)=x\int _0^t f^\blacklozenge (\xi )d\xi \) for all \((x,t)\in [0,1]\times {{\mathbb {R}}} ,\) see Fig. 1. The problem (3.8) can be studied again with the new potential term f.
References
Atay, M.T., Kartal, S., Hadjian, A.: Computation of eigenvalues of Sturm–Liouville Problems using Homotopy perturbation method. Int. J. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 11, 105–112 (2010)
Averna, D., Giovannelli, N., Tornatore, E.: Existence of three solutions for a mixed boundary value problem with the Sturm–Liouville equation. Bull. Korean Math. Soc. 49, 1213–1222 (2012)
Bonanno, G.: A critical points theorem and nonlinear differential problems. J. Global Optim. 28, 249–258 (2004)
Bonanno, G., Bella, B.D.: A fourth-order boundary value problem for a Sturm–Liouville type equation. Appl. Math. Comput. 217, 3635–3640 (2010)
Bonanno, G., Candito, P.: Non-differentiable functionals and applications to elliptic problems with discontinuous nonlinearities. J. Differ. Equ. 244, 3031–3059 (2008)
Bonanno, G., Candito, P., ÓRegan, D.: Existence of nontrivial solutions for sixth-order differential equations. Mathematics 9, 9 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/math9161852
Bonanno, G., Livrea, R.: A sequence of positive solutions for sixth-order ordinary nonlinear differential problems. Electron. J. Qual. Theory Differ. Equ. 20, 1–17 (2021)
El-Gamel, M., Sameeh, M.: An efficient technique for finding the eigenvalues of fourth-order Sturm–Liouville problems. Appl. Math. 3, 920–925 (2012)
Heidarkhani, S.: Existence of solutions for a two-point boundary-value problem of a fourth-order Sturm–Liouville type. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 84, 1–15 (2012)
Heidarkhani, S.: Non-trivial solutions for two-point boundary-value problems of fourth-order Sturm–Liouville type equations. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 27, 1–9 (2012)
Ge, W., Ren, J.: New existence theorems of positive solutions for Sturm–Liouville boundary value problems. Appl. Math. Comput. 148, 631–644 (2004)
Greenberg, L., Marletta, M.: Oscillation theory and numerical solution of sixth order Sturm–Liouville problems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 35, 2070–2098 (1998)
Gutierrez, R.H., Laura, P.A.: Vibrations of non-uniform rings studied by means of the differential quadrature method. J. Sound Vib. 185, 507–513 (1995)
Lesnic, D., Attili, B.S.: An efficient method for sixth-order Sturm–Liouville problems. Int. J. Sci. Technol. 2, 109–114 (2007)
Li, Y.: On the existence and nonexistence of positive solutions for nonlinear Sturm–Liouville boundary value problems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 304, 74–86 (2005)
Perera, U., Böckmann, C.: Solutions of direct and inverse even-order Sturm–Liouville problems using magnus expansion. Mathematics 7, 24 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/math7060544
Rattana, A., Böckmann, C.: Matrix methods for computing eigenvalues of Sturm–Liouville problems of order four. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 249, 144–156 (2013)
Shokooh, S.: Variational techniques for a system of Sturm–Liouville equations. J. Elliptic Parabol. Equ. (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41808-023-00217-9
Taher, A.S., Malek, A.: An efficient algorithm for solving high order Sturm–Liouville problems using variational iteration method. Fixed Point Theory 14, 193–210 (2013)
Taher, A.S., Malek, A., Momeni-Masuleh, S.: Chebyshev differentiation matrices for efficient computation of the eigenvalues of fourth-order Sturm–Liouville problems. Appl. Math. Model. 37, 4634–4642 (2013)
Tian, Y., Ge, W.G.: Variational methods to Sturm–Liouville boundary value problem for impulsive differential equations. Nonlinear Anal. 72, 277–287 (2009)
Tian, Y., Liu, X.: Applications of variational methods to Sturm–Liouville boundary value problem for fourth-order impulsive differential equations. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 37, 95–105 (2014)
Zeidler, E.: Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Its Applications, vol. II. Berlin, Germany (1990)
Zhao, Y., Chen, H.: Multiplicity of solutions to two-point boundary value problems for a second-order impulsive differential equation. Appl. Math. Comput. 206, 925–931 (2008)
Zhao, Y., Li, H., Zhang, Q.: Existence results for an impulsive Sturm–Liouville boundary value problems with mixed double parameters. Bound. Value Probl. 150, 1–17 (2015)
Acknowledgements
The author would like to expresses his sincere gratitude to the referee for reading this paper carefully and specially for valuable comments concerning improvement of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Shokooh, S. Existence of solutions for a sixth-order nonlinear equation. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo, II. Ser 72, 4251–4271 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12215-023-00901-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12215-023-00901-8